Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Fix for slice_experiments if image_range != (1,N) #1383

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Aug 27, 2020

Conversation

rjgildea
Copy link
Contributor

Gorilla of temporary workarounds for inconsistent scan and imageset slicing
(cctbx/dxtbx#213).

Fixes #1382

Gorilla of temporary workarounds for inconsistent scan and imageset slicing
(cctbx/dxtbx#213).

Fixes #1382
rjgildea added a commit to xia2/xia2 that referenced this pull request Aug 26, 2020
Apparently expt.imageset.get_scan() is a different scan instance to
expt.scan. As highlighted by dials/dials#1383 it it necessary to ensure
that both scan objects have the same batch_offset.
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Aug 26, 2020

Codecov Report

Merging #1383 into master will decrease coverage by 0.00%.
The diff coverage is 100.00%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #1383      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   64.61%   64.60%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files         615      615              
  Lines       69872    69871       -1     
  Branches     9547     9547              
==========================================
- Hits        45145    45143       -2     
  Misses      22953    22953              
- Partials     1774     1775       +1     

@rjgildea rjgildea merged commit e58d8fa into master Aug 27, 2020
@rjgildea rjgildea deleted the slice_experiments_1382 branch August 27, 2020 15:01
rjgildea added a commit to xia2/xia2 that referenced this pull request Aug 28, 2020
Apparently expt.imageset.get_scan() is a different scan instance to
expt.scan. As highlighted by dials/dials#1383 it it necessary to ensure
that both scan objects have the same batch_offset.
ndevenish pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 1, 2020
Gorilla of temporary workarounds for inconsistent scan and imageset slicing
(cctbx/dxtbx#213).

Also: Add slice_experiments test for #1382

Fixes #1382
@ndevenish ndevenish mentioned this pull request Sep 1, 2020
ndevenish pushed a commit to xia2/xia2 that referenced this pull request Sep 1, 2020
Apparently expt.imageset.get_scan() is a different scan instance to
expt.scan. As highlighted by dials/dials#1383 it it necessary to ensure
that both scan objects have the same batch_offset.
ndevenish added a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 1, 2020
- ``dials.scale``: Prevent discarding of resolution limits in rare cases, which could cause incorrect symmetry determination, and worse results. (#1378)
- ``dials.cosym``: filter out experiments with inconsistent unit cells (#1380)
- Internally slicing experiments now works if image range doesn't start at 1 (#1383)
- Restore missing I/sigma(I) resolution estimate log output (#1384)
- ``dials.image_viewer``: "Save As" button now works, for single panels
- Fix developer ``libtbx.precommit`` installation error (#1375
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

slice_experiments broken if image_range doesn't start at 1
1 participant